[Beowulf] Glenn Lockwood's Thoughts on the NSF Future Directions Interim Report
Michael Di Domenico
mdidomenico4 at gmail.com
Mon Feb 2 05:38:47 PST 2015
Glenn's article is good and hits on many topics correctly (of which
i've seen, having sat on the vendor side of NSF proposals in a former
life). However I'm a little concerned by what i perceive of his
attitude towards stripping funding from centers that don't have the
technical prowess to run an HPC resources.
NSF's goal is to further science. stripping funding, i don't believe
is the correct solution. if a center isn't keeping up or doesn't have
the skills from the start, there should be a mentor put in place from
one of the other bigger centers. stripping funding is only going to
shrink the pool of knowledge to a few key installations around the US,
which probably isn't the best way to spread knowledge. but i do
concur there is a point where the NSF would probably/already has
spread itself too thin
seems to me NFS needs to get back into building the HPC community of
PEOPLE rather then building hero machines at six or seven
installations across the us.
just my 2 cents...
On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Prentice Bisbal
<prentice.bisbal at rutgers.edu> wrote:
> Glenn Lockwood has written another great blog post. This one is a critique
> of the National Academies future directions for the NSF interim report. I
> haven't read the actual report yet, but I read Glenn's post and agree with
> it 100%.
> My apologies to Chris Samuels and others not affected by NSF funding.
> Prentice Bisbal
> Manager of Information Technology
> Rutgers Discovery Informatics Institute (RDI2)
> Rutgers University
> Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org sponsored by Penguin Computing
> To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit
More information about the Beowulf